Help support TMP


"Early Saxon and Romano-British basing" Topic


8 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please don't make fun of others' membernames.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board


Action Log

27 Jun 2019 10:45 a.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Changed title from "Early Saxon and RomanoBritish basing" to "Early Saxon and Romano-British basing"

Areas of Interest

Ancients

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

28mm Babylonian Spearmen from Castaway Arts

We look at spearmen from Castaway Arts' new Babylonian line.


Featured Profile Article

Puzzling About the Battle of Delium: Part 1

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian considers the Battle of Delium, 424 B.C.


Featured Book Review


745 hits since 27 Jun 2019
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Virtualscratchbuilder Supporting Member of TMP Fezian27 Jun 2019 10:44 a.m. PST

This may be a cart-before-the-horse question because I have no rules in mind… but I wondering how best to create units for these two armies….. units organized by weapon and/or type – as in "Oh look! there's a unit of spearmen, and over there, some armored axemen" or mixed bag – unarmored spearmen mixed in with armored spearmen, axemen, swordsmen, etc. into one unit.

Dervel Fezian27 Jun 2019 1:02 p.m. PST

Well, you really should think rules first.

That said I have my later Saxon and Normans grouped by Armor and quality of equipment more than weapon.


This is primarily due to the Heavily armored and or better dressed guys tend to be "elite" while the less armored are just "heavy" infantry in the rules I use.

The poorly dressed and poorly armed (maybe no shield for example, or just a staff) tend to be based as horde and rabble.

Frederick Supporting Member of TMP27 Jun 2019 1:48 p.m. PST

I also group my Dark Ages armies by armour/equipment; they usually have a mix of weapons. I do though group archers together

Aethelflaeda was framed28 Jun 2019 5:28 a.m. PST

I suspect that every armored warrior of means had the earlier equivalent of a squire or retainer with lesser equipment close by. I doubt they fought by units organized by quality of kit but more on a clan or community basis. Huscarls might be the only exception being essentially the full time professionals who would be better equipped and perhaps also fighting as a single body but I would expect they had quite a few retainers mixed in as well.

For gaming terms, I would say it was what level or sort of equipment predominates, not that it is completely uniform.

Cerdic28 Jun 2019 11:39 a.m. PST

I agree with Aethelflaeda.

A 'unit' would probably consist of a big nob plus his various kin, retainers, hangers-on, etc. What kit they possessed was irrelevant.

I feel it is unlikely that if Uncle Brian didn't have a mail shirt he would be sent away to go and stand with all the other blokes from the shire who had no mail shirts…

Henry Martini01 Jul 2019 6:52 p.m. PST

Huscarls belong to a much later era.

Elenderil03 Jul 2019 4:48 a.m. PST

I suggest that you base with armoured types predominating in the front rank and unarmoured in the rear.

I use DBx and ADLG as my rules of choice so basing is by element of a single type of troops. That said there is no reason why a base of, lets say Anglo Saxon HI spearmen, shouldn't have a mix of types in it provided it is still easily identifiable as HI spearmen.

As others have said rules first then basing choices will follow automatically.

Asteroid X03 Jul 2019 9:25 a.m. PST

"HI"?

Is that Heavy Infantry?

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.